Exploratory study of staff perceptions of shift safety in the critical care unit and routinely available data on workforce, patient and organisational factors.

OBJECTIVES: To explore bedside professional reported (BPR) perceptions of safety in intensive care staff and the relationships between BPR safety, staffing, patient and work environment characteristics.
DESIGN: An exploratory study of self-recorded staff perceptions of shift safety and routinely collected data.
SETTING: A large teaching hospital comprising 70 critical care beds. PARTICIPANTS: All clinical staff working in adult critical care.
INTERVENTIONS: Staff recorded whether their shift felt 'safe, unsafe or very unsafe' for 29 consecutive days. We explored these perceptions and relationships between them and routine data on staffing, patient and environmental characteristics. OUTCOME MEASURES: Relationships between BPR safety and staffing, patient and work environment characteristics.
RESULTS: 2836 BPR scores were recorded over 29 consecutive days (response rate 57.7%). Perceptions of safety varied between staff, including within the same shift. There was no correlation between perceptions of safety and two measures of staffing: care hours per patient day (r=0.13 p=0.108) and Safecare Allocate (r=-0.19 p=0.013). We found a significant, positive relationship between perceptions of safety and the percentage of level 3 (most severely ill) patients (r=0.32, p=0.0001). There was a significant inverse relationship between perceptions of safety and the percentage of level 1 patients on a shift (r=-0.42, p<0.0001). Perceptions of safety correlated negatively with increased numbers of patients (r=-0.44, p=0.0006) and higher percentage of patients located side rooms (r=0.63, p<0.0001). We found a significant relationship between perceptions of safety and the percentage of staff with a specialist critical care course (r=0.42. p=0.0001).
CONCLUSION: Existing staffing models, which are primarily influenced by staff-to-patient ratios, may not be sensitive to patient need. Other factors may be important drivers of staff perceptions of safety and should be explored further. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.